Early Journal Content on JSTOR, Free to Anyone in the World
This article is one of nearly 500,000 scholarly works digitized and made freely available to everyone in
the world by JSTOR.
Known as the Early Journal Content, this set of works include research articles, news, letters, and other
writings published in more than 200 of the oldest leading academic journals. The works date from the
mid-seventeenth to the early twentieth centuries.
We encourage people to read and share the Early Journal Content openly and to tell others that this
resource exists. People may post this content online or redistribute in any way for non-commercial
Read more about Early Journal Content at http://about.jstor.org/participate-jstor/individuals/early-
JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary source objects. JSTOR helps people
discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content through a powerful research and teaching
platform, and preserves this content for future generations. JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a not-for-profit
organization that also includes Ithaka S+R and Portico. For more information about JSTOR, please
MODERN LANGUAGE NOTES.
and metrical functions of hyrde ic are clearly seen
in 1. 2163 : hyrde in />at paw, frcstwum feower
mearasl hmgre geliee last weardode.*
5. Finally, what is the true nature of the paleo-
graphical evidence of which so much has been
made? As Mr. F. E. Bryant has pointed out
(Mod. Lang. Notes, xix, 121), hecfoo of heafioscil-
fingas (1. 63) appears to be written over an erasure,
though no letter underneath heafto can be made
out with certainty. "What conclusion regarding
the original reading of the passage can be drawn
from this fact ? None whatever. The scribe had
made a mistake, which he corrected. That is all
the erasure tells us. Whether that unlucky scribal
blunder which has caused so much headache to
modern scholars, occurred before or after elan cwen,
cannot be learned from it Nor do we know
whether the (first) scribe of our Beowulf copy
actually committed or merely transmitted it. Be-
sides can we really be sure that what he erased was
not simply a blot of ink ?
There would be some point in Mr. Abbott's
paleographical argumentation if in the original ms.
the half-lines had been indicated as such, but this
is out of the question.
To sum up. There is no reason to transfer
HrotSulf from the line of the Scyldings to that of
the Scylfings. He is not the son-in-law of Healf-
dene. The names of Healfdene's daughter and
her husband are unknown to us. Of the different
names proposed for the daughter, Elan, Sigeneow,
Yrde, and for the son-in-law, Onela, Ongen/>eow,
Scewela, Hrd&ulf, those of Yrde and Hroftulf must
certainly be ruled out.
University of Minnesota.
DID THACKEKAY WBITE
Elizabeth Brovmrigge t
It is a well-known and curious fact that the
authorship of Elizabeth Brovmrigge has never
been definitely fixed ; nor have the arguments, for
'Certainly the phrase does not point to the composer's
11 uncertainty of information," as has been supposed ( Mod.
Lang. Notes, sex, 121).
and against, ascribing that burlesque to Thackeray
ever been succinctly gathered and stated, so far as
I am aware. The piece in question first appeared
in Fraser'8 Magazine for August and September,
1832, and occupies, in all, about forty double-
column pages of that monthly. It is dedicated
"to the author of Eugene Aram," and is a rather
clever parody on that romance of criminal life.
Now, if Thackeray wrote Elizabeth Brovmrigge,
it is a significant fact that he nowhere lays claim
to it, nor does any one seem to have ascribed it to
him until after his death, — a period of over thirty
years after its publication. The first suggestion
that Thackeray was the probable author of the
burlesque was made by Dr. John Brown, in an
article reviewing Thackeray and his work, in the
North British Review for February, 1864, (Vol.
XL, 216 sq.). The original Thackeray bibliog-
raphy, compiled by Mr. K. H. Shepherd, 1880,
contained no mention of Elizabeth Brovmrigge, and
the "Works of William Makepeace Thackeray,"
completed in 1886, failed to include it. The poet
Swinburne called Mr. Shepherd's attention to the
probable omission from the 1880 bibliography in
the unusually guarded statement that " ' Elizabeth
Brownrigge' . . . ought to be Thackeray's, for,
if it is not, he stole the idea, and to some extent
the style, [from it, for Catherine (pr. 1839)]." l
Not until 1887, when Mr. Shepherd collected and
published "Sultan Stork and other Stories and
Sketches by William Makepeace Thackeray," was
Elizabeth Brownrigge reprinted from the columns
That a burlesque showing so much critical
acumen and literary skill should remain unclaimed
and unidentified so long gives some color to the
improbability of its belonging to Thackeray.
Furthermore, if Thackeray wrote Elizabeth Brown-
rigge, it is out of all proportion in size and quality
to the other productions of Thackeray's earliest
literary years, and seems to be a reversal in the
evolution of his work. Such an anomaly is, of
course, possible, but it is more or less improbable
that an aspiring youth of twenty-one should fail to
take advantage of the opening which this smart bit
of burlesque should have made for him in Eraser's
1 Letter from A. C. Swinburne to K. H. Shepherd, dated
December 24, 1880. Eeprinted in Sultan Stork, etc,
Introd., p. vii.
MODERN LANGUAGE NOTES.
[Vol xx, No. 1.
columns, particularly since Thackeray was not
only gifted in the rdle of burlesquer, (as ■witness
practically all of his ■writings before and imme-
diately after 1832), but also he was in urgent
need, at this time, of employment. Again, to
strengthen this view, it would seem strange that
one should write for a magazine a story, parody
though it be, so sustained in quality and of the
length of Elizabeth Brownrigge, and not continue
to contribute to the same periodical. Nevertheless,
with the exception of The King of Brentford (a
jeu d' esprit in imitation of Beranger's U Uait un
Roi d'Yvetot), it is nearly five years after the
publication of Elizabeth Brownrigge before Thack-
eray is certainly identified (in the Yellowplush Cor-
respondence) as a regular contributor to Eraser's.
And as a final possible objection to the Thackeray
authorship of the burlesque on Eugene Aram, it
should be noted that another might have written
the burlesque story under consideration : Thack-
eray could hardly have been alone in seeing the
weak points in Bulwer's armor, and the tone of
criticism in 1832 was so common to the multitude
of writers that it is no easy task to determine the
authorship of a given piece from solely internal
On the other hand, favoring the Thackeray
authorship, strong evidence might be deduced
from a comparison of Elizabeth Brownrigge with
Catherine. While, as a literary effort, the latter
is easily the superior of the former, and while the
satire is less bitter and the burlesque more open
and palatable in the later performance ; the pur-
pose, method, and style of the two are identical.
Both are particularly aimed at Bulwer ; they con-
tain similar expressions characteristic of Thack-
eray ; and, above all, the tenets of ' realism '
which Thackeray gradually developed for himself
and on which he based his great novels, appear in
both burlesques as no one but Thackeray, of all
his contemporaries, has expressed them. In the
dedication to Elizabeth Brownrigge we read the
following, addressed to Bulwer : "I am told . . .
that in a former work, having to paint an adul-
terer, you described him as belonging to the class
of country curates, among whom, perhaps, such a
criminal is not met with once in a hundred years ;
while, on the contrary, being in search of a tender-
hearted, generous, sentimental, high-minded hero
of romance, you turned to the pages of the Newgate
Calendar, and looked for him in the list of men
who have cut throats for money, among whom a
person in possession of such qualities could never
have been met with at all." And in a note
appended to the first chapter of Catherine we find
this explanation of the author's purpose : "The
amusing novel of Ernest Maltravers . . . opens
with a seduction ; but then it is performed by
persons of the strictest virtue on both sides ; and
there is so much religion and philosophy in the
heart of the seducer, so much tender innocence in
the soul of the seduced, that — bless the little
dears ! — their very peccadilloes make one inter-
ested in them ; and their naughtiness becomes
quite sacred, so deliriously is it described. Now,
if we are to be interested by rascally action, let us
have them with plain faces, and let them be per-
formed, not by virtuous philosophers, but by
rascals." And more to the same effect. This
insistence on novelists representing character as it
is in the world is the motivation common to Eliza-
beth Brownrigge and Catherine; and its expression
in both is in Thackeray's vein, as evidenced by
numerous others of his literary and art criticisms
of the period between 1830 and 1840. Another
stricture on Bulwer's practice of reversing the
characters of life in his novels may be compared
with the foregoing in Thackeray's "Our Batch of
Novels for Christmas, 1837," published in Eraser's
for January, 1838 (Vol. 17, pp. 79-103), in
which Ernest Maltravers is, for the third time,
handled after the same manner. In the same
article Thackeray makes the following comment
on Mrs. Trollope's Vicar of Wrexhill: "Mrs.
Trollope may make a licentious book of which the
heroes and heroines are all of the evangelical
party ; and it may be true, that there are scoundrels
belonging to that party as to every other ; but her
shameful error has been in fixing upon the evan-
gelical class as an object of satire, making them
necessarily licentious and hypocritical, and charg-
ing upon every one of them the vices which belong
to a very few of all sects . . . ." This is of an
exact piece with the quotation from the dedication
to Elizabeth Brownrigge, and may be traced, in
spirit and expression, through the review of "The
Duchess of Marlborough's Private Correspon-
dence" (1838), "French Literature" (1833),
MODERN LANGUAGE NOTES.
"Strictures on Pictures" (1838), "Madame
Sand and Spiridion" (1839), etc., etc., to
mention only examples from Thackeray's early
writings. The aim and execution of the author of
Elizabeth Brownrigge is in such perfect harmony
with the above citations and with qualities that
are peculiarly Thackeray's that, without absolute
proofs to the contrary, it does not seem over rash
to assign that burlesque to him.
GOETHE'S Hermann und Dorothea AND
The last six years have produced three editions
of Hermann und Dorothea by American editors,
and a fourth is promised us in the near future.
The purposes of the editors is necessarily deter-
mined by the needs that the text is designed to
meet, and the editions make greater or less pre-
tense of scholarship accordingly. We do not
demand a large amount of original investigation
for a school edition ; a presentation of the most
essential facts already known, adapted to the
needs of the student is what we may expect and is
all that is necessary. A certain amount of repe-
tition of the work of others is inevitable and often
desirable ; certain things are said by every editor
of H. und D. and must be said by every suc-
cessor ; indeed, it is often better to quote the
words of an earlier editor than to appropriate his
thought and present it as one's own in a muti-
lated form. And yet even for the editor of the
most unpretentious edition there is often oppor-
tunity for verification and sifting of the state-
ments of his predecessors.
Among the things that are inevitable in an
edition of Goethe's idyll are references to "the
Homeric quality" which pervades it and the
student finds numerous citations and annotations
to bear this out. For this there is abundant
opportunity and justification, perhaps for even
more than is ordinarily said. Victor Hehn 1 has
1 Victor Hehn, TJeber Goethes Hermann und Dorothea.
Zweite verbesserte Auflage, page 127 ft Stuttgart, Cotta,
collected the most conspicuous passages which
suggest reminiscences of Homer and Vergil, and
most of our modern editions contain them in the
annotations. Concerning line 107 of the seventh
canto of H. und D., there prevails remarkable
unanimity of opinion among the later American
editors in referring it to the direct influence of
Voss' translation. The line reads :
"In den Brunnen zuriick, und susses Verlangen ergrifl
Hart ' has no note on this line.
Hewitt * annotates :
' ' An Homeric expression. See Iliad, in. 446,
Voss' translation :
' Wie ich jetzt dich liebe und susses Verlangen ergreift
Hatfield 4 makes the following comment :
"Cf. Biad, in, 446:
&s <reo vvv (papal xal /ie y\vxis fywpot alpei
translated by Voss :
Wie ich jetzt dich liebe und susses Verlangen ergreift
Palmer 6 : "An Homeric expression, fixed in
this form by Voss in his translation of the Biad,
in, 446 :
Wie ich jetzt dich liebe und susses Verlangen ergreift
Adams' merely quotes Hewett.
In spite of the positive statement in the anno-
tations of the editors cited above that the line in
question was translated by Voss in the form given
by them an attempt to verify the quotation was
singularly disappointing, for in the Beclam * edi-
tion it appears in this guise :
Als ich anjetzt dir gliihe, durchbebt von sussem Verlangen.
This failure of the Reclam text to agree with
1 James Morgan Hart, Goethe's Hermann und Dorothea.
New York, Putnam's Sons, 1875.
8 W. T. Hewett, Goethe's H. u. D. D. C. Heath &
Co., Boston, 1891.
1 James Taft Hatfield, Goethe's H. u. D. Macmillan,
New York, 1899.
6 Arthur H. Palmer, Goethe's H. u. D. D. Appleton
& Co., New York, 1903.
«W. A. Adams, Goethe's H. u. D. D. C. Heath &
Co., Boston, 1904.
' Beclam' s Universal-Biblioihek, No. 251-253. Neudruck
der ersten Ausgabe, Leipzig.